Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
The Basics, Starting Out
What makes for a barrel burner?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Derek M." data-source="post: 429333" data-attributes="member: 2693"><p>My guess is because the parallel argument is using a 22 cal bullet or a 243 on deer v. a 270 at whatever yardage one wishes to compare to the elk scenario. </p><p></p><p>Bottom line is dead is dead, and if you can do it with a 7mag and a 180 Berger, why bother with anything bigger? How much better is dead from one v. dead from the other? There are plenty of guys who use 6.5mm bullets, 7mm bullets, 30 cal bullets on elk and do a fine job with it. There are videos available everywhere to see it happen, so really what it boils down to is "does size really matter?" </p><p></p><p>Here's the old BOTW video in their first Beyond Belief where a bull elk is taken with a 168 Berger VLD from a 7mag at 743 yards:</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caEeYaJuhKA&feature=related" target="_blank">YouTube - long range</a></p><p></p><p>I'm sure you've seen it. Personally, I have a 300 RUM and two 7mm Rem Mags. I'd use any on elk but to date, my elk have been killed with archery as it is my preference.</p><p></p><p>Is there really any valid reason to argue with someone else's success? This is just like the old debate as to whether or not a 270 can kill an elk. To this day there are still hunters who say it is a weenie caliber not suited for it and they'll say it face to face with hunters who've killed a lot of elk with the 270. Quite a puzzling phenomenon.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Derek M., post: 429333, member: 2693"] My guess is because the parallel argument is using a 22 cal bullet or a 243 on deer v. a 270 at whatever yardage one wishes to compare to the elk scenario. Bottom line is dead is dead, and if you can do it with a 7mag and a 180 Berger, why bother with anything bigger? How much better is dead from one v. dead from the other? There are plenty of guys who use 6.5mm bullets, 7mm bullets, 30 cal bullets on elk and do a fine job with it. There are videos available everywhere to see it happen, so really what it boils down to is "does size really matter?" Here's the old BOTW video in their first Beyond Belief where a bull elk is taken with a 168 Berger VLD from a 7mag at 743 yards: [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caEeYaJuhKA&feature=related]YouTube - long range[/url] I'm sure you've seen it. Personally, I have a 300 RUM and two 7mm Rem Mags. I'd use any on elk but to date, my elk have been killed with archery as it is my preference. Is there really any valid reason to argue with someone else's success? This is just like the old debate as to whether or not a 270 can kill an elk. To this day there are still hunters who say it is a weenie caliber not suited for it and they'll say it face to face with hunters who've killed a lot of elk with the 270. Quite a puzzling phenomenon. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
The Basics, Starting Out
What makes for a barrel burner?
Top